|
Post by vicky on Sept 25, 2018 6:27:10 GMT
I'm another who doesn't know the story and I fully agree with linseed's view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2018 10:08:06 GMT
I remember the 1998 version (at which point I hadn't read the book) and being worried (rather naively, now I come to look back on it!) that {SPOILER:Click to Show}Dobbin would be killed!
|
|
|
Post by marion on Sept 25, 2018 10:38:51 GMT
I found this week's episode rather laboured. Maybe it covered too long a period, but it didn't engage me as much.
|
|
|
Post by beverley61 on Sept 25, 2018 10:53:03 GMT
It's strange isn't it Thackeray doesn't write an episode of the battle and the aftermath, perhaps he also thought it was too big a subject to cover in what is after all a domestic story. Maybe that is why this episode felt clunky because that bit was not in it. It was published as a serial so in other aspects it should convert well to TV, two or three of the original episodes into one for TV etc. but with the introduction of the battle we had to have prolonged scenes of the women waiting it out and troops walking up misty roads. The novel focuses on the women in Belgium and what is happening there with the panic and the people not sure whether to flee, the locals winding them up and the fear that French soldiers will attack the city.
It's a huge book though and not often read now. It was common enough as an A level book back in the day when students had to read the whole book but nowadays if it featured it would probably focus on one or two episodes for the shorter question in the paper. In reality it probably is too big for A Level when you factor in the other books that also have to be covered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2018 13:13:53 GMT
Thackery said something like "We do not count ourselves among the military novelists". Perhaps he meant it literally - maybe he didn't feel narrating battles was his forte so decided it was best avoided. But the way he writes {SPOILER:Click to Show}George's death is highly effective and affecting.
|
|
|
Post by linseed on Sept 25, 2018 16:56:06 GMT
I’m not sure how accurate any of this was, but the stylised way the soldiers were standing in perfect little squares and then firing all in unison. And all wearing bright red elaborate uniforms, so they were easily picked out. All looks so strange now, almost unreal. 100 years later it was WW1 and it was all utterly changed.
|
|
|
Post by vicky on Sept 25, 2018 18:02:06 GMT
Wasn't it during the Boer War that the British Army abandoned bright red uniforms for khaki? They realised that red coats made the soldiers easy targets for the Boer snipers so went for something that blended into the background. Until then warfare had been an oddly formal and stylised affair I think.
|
|
|
Post by linseed on Sept 25, 2018 18:26:02 GMT
I think you’re right Vicky, they changed from red to Khaki in the Boer War
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2018 23:29:49 GMT
Muskets only had an accurate (by which I mean 'could hit a man sized target') range of around 80 yards even under ideal conditions; generally speaking it was considered wasteful to fire earlier than about 50 yards. Rifles were far more accurate (up to 400 yards) but up to four times as slow to load and far more complex and expensive to manufacture, and took longer to train with, so were largely left in the hands of elite skirmishers. Under such circumstances close-range volley fire was the only practical solution for the majority of infantry. Together with the thick clouds of white smoke produced by the gunpowder, camouflage was largely pointless and being able to tell who was who was far more important. (Trivia: the New Model Army, who were the first English soldiers to adopt the red coat as a universal uniform in 1645, chose that colour not to hide the blood as commonly thought, but simply because it was the cheapest cloth available in large quantities). It was only in the middle of the century that improved manufacturing techniques and advancing technology meant it was practical for rifles to become standard issue. The development soon after of practical breechloading guns and powder that produced less smoke quickly rendered colourful uniforms obsolete, but it took a while for uniforms to catch up with technology.
|
|
|
Post by beverley61 on Sept 26, 2018 11:08:09 GMT
Yes this was only a step up from previous eras where canon fired and then men charged. It was still largely hand to hand fighting. To be truthful it can still be nowadays, speak to any soldier returning from war and they will have been involved or know troops that have been involved in hand to hand fighting.
|
|
|
Post by beverley61 on Oct 8, 2018 6:36:32 GMT
Well, if this had not been up against the Bodyguard I think it would have rated more highly. Yes, the last episode crammed a lot in but overall this was very well done.
|
|
|
Post by vicky on Oct 8, 2018 7:40:59 GMT
Well, if this had not been up against the Bodyguard I think it would have rated more highly. Yes, the last episode crammed a lot in but overall this was very well done. Totally agree. I know there have been anomilies but, in the overall scheme of things, they haven't mattered because the production has been so good. I have particularly enjoyed the visual feast that it has provided with the costumes and the settings. Excellent acting too, especially from Olivia Cooke as Becky. I am going to miss it.
|
|
|
Post by marion on Oct 8, 2018 9:12:17 GMT
I enjoyed it too and agree it suffered badly by being against Bodyguard and now The Cry. I always watched it first as I can't settle into a lighter show after watching something fraught, and catch the BBC shows on my recorder. But it was well done I thought and had a very good Becky. I loved the final scene with her servants drinking the champagne.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 17:30:12 GMT
Enjoyed it all so much and after reading/seeing/watching am pleased I gave Bodyguard a complete miss. Loved the last scenes on the carousel smiling into the future and of course the reconciliation with Amelia. Dobbin happy at last!
|
|
|
Post by vicky on Oct 8, 2018 18:06:27 GMT
I did get cross with Amelia for the way she was treating poor Dobbin. The review in today's Telegraph says "....Captain Dobbin (a far too good looking Johnny Flynn)....." . As I've said before, I haven't read Vanity Fair so don't know how Thackeray portrayed his characters but does this statement mean that Dobbin is supposed to be a bit unprepossessing?
|
|